Poll: Should TPGs encapsulate known counterfeit coins?

astrorat

Should TPGs encapsulate coins known to be counterfeit?

I thought I would pose this question since I just purchased a couple of known counterfeits (from the same submission) encapsulated by one of the major TPGs and found it odd they were knowingly encapsulated as forgeries AND sold on eBay as such.

Edit to add "Poll" to the title ...

messydesk

ICG currently will encapsulate contemporary counterfeits:

ricko

Why not? They make excellent teaching tools. One who pays for the encapsulation is hardly likely to crack it and pass it off..... Cheers, RickO

Coinsponge

Well at least they should not give it a grade. We cannot even get grade opinions for genuine coins with some problem.

MrEureka

I'd like the TPGs to do it. It would be good for those of us who collect counterfeits, and it would be good for educational purposes.

However, I doubt it will ever happen to any significant extent. As things are now, TPG's are able to advertise that "If you buy a coin in a XYZ holder, you know it's authentic". Slabbing counterfeits would complicate the message that needs to be told.

BTW, there is one other issue. If a TPG were to start slabbing counterfeits, they would want to differentiate between "contemporary counterfeits", i.e., those made long ago for the purpose of passing as money, and other fakes that were made later, for the purpose of being sold to a numismatist. However, the TPGs may not have sufficient expertise in these matters. That may seem trivial to some, but contemporary counterfeits can get expensive, and it may pay for modern day counterfeiters to make new copies of the old counterfeits.

CaptHenway

In my personal opinion, no.

Sonorandesertrat

"BTW, there is one other issue. If a TPG were to start slabbing counterfeits, they would want to differentiate between "contemporary counterfeits", i.e., those made long ago for the purpose of passing as money, and other fakes that were made later, for the purpose of being sold to a numismatist. However, the TPGs may not have sufficient expertise in these matters. That may seem trivial to some, but contemporary counterfeits can get expensive, and it may pay for modern day counterfeiters to make new copies of the old counterfeits."

This is precisely the reason why slabbing counterfeits would be a bad idea. If any grading company starts doing this, I will seriously consider crossing over anything I have slabbed by that firm. At some point, the desire for maintaining a nice revenue stream can cause a branding problem.

astrorat

<< <i>"BTW, there is one other issue. If a TPG were to start slabbing counterfeits, they would want to differentiate between "contemporary counterfeits", i.e., those made long ago for the purpose of passing as money, and other fakes that were made later, for the purpose of being sold to a numismatist. However, the TPGs may not have sufficient expertise in these matters. That may seem trivial to some, but contemporary counterfeits can get expensive, and it may pay for modern day counterfeiters to make new copies of the old counterfeits."

This is precisely the reason why slabbing counterfeits would be a bad idea. If any grading company starts doing this, I will seriously consider crossing over anything I have slabbed by that firm. At some point, the desire for maintaining a nice revenue stream can cause a branding problem. >>

Are you aware that both PCGS and NGC (PMG) authenticate and grade counterfeit Confederate notes? While I realize that it's their currency grading divisions, but both companies have already made the leap to encapsulating/slabbing counterfeit numismatic items. How soon before counterfeit coins join their counterfeit currency brethren?

Edited for grammar ...

BryceM

Nope. Bad idea. "Questionable Authenticity" allows for legal wiggle-room should the authorities show up. Possession and trafficking in certified counterfeit coins could cause certain headaches for those involved.

Zoins

<< <i>ICG currently will encapsulate contemporary counterfeits:

>>



VAMs cover counterfeits? I didn't realize that about VAMs until just now.

magikbilly

I see that some baseball grading company has started slabbing news clippings/anything it seems.

Eric

coinsarefun

<< <i>.BTW, there is one other issue. If a TPG were to start slabbing counterfeits, they would want to differentiate between "contemporary counterfeits", i.e., those made long ago for the purpose of passing as money, and other fakes that were made later, for the purpose of being sold to a numismatist. However, the TPGs may not have sufficient expertise in these matters. That may seem trivial to some, but contemporary counterfeits can get expensive, and it may pay for modern day counterfeiters to make new copies of the old counterfeits. >>










Andy has a very strong point. The counterfeits such as electrotypes, Wyatt/Bishop strikes and more are very expensive and exceeding
rare in their own right. Most were made for education, museums and for fellow numismatists to enjoy that didn't have a boatload of money.

Not unlike the Bolen Copies and or Robinson Higley Merchant tokens, they can be indicated on the slab as counterfeit.
I highly doubt that someone that dishes out $1-2k and up for these would crack it out when they are rare on its own and has been slabbed as such.


Just sayin

Dave99B

Nope.

Dave

LochNESS

<< <i>Andy has a very strong point. The counterfeits such as electrotypes, Wyatt/Bishop strikes and more are very expensive and exceeding
rare in their own right. Most were made for education, museums and for fellow numismatists to enjoy that didn't have a boatload of money. >>


So, that educational replica 8 Reales, which I purchased from the Fort St. Augustine gift shop might be worth more than $1 someday?

PCGS = coin grading service. They should stick to grading and slabbing coins. If they want to make money slabbing replicas, let them open a separate business.

PerryHall

PCGS slabs the so-called New Haven restrike Fugio cents which aren't true restrikes since original dies weren't used but are actually counterfeits struck from new dies around 1860.

PerryHall

Do any TPG's slab the Machin Mills coins that are imitation of contemporary British coins?

indeetlib

<< <i>Do any TPG's slab the Machin Mills coins that are imitation of contemporary British coins? >>



Yes, both NGC and PCGS do. Unfortunately, they often get them wrong, attributing other non-regal halfpennies and even normal, regal halfpennies as "Machin's Mills"

Just noticed this. If you look up 1771 Machin's Mills Halfpennies on Coinfacts, the first picture is of a clearly regal 1771 British Halfpenny in AU58:



I'm hoping that picture was just entered into the wrong category on Coinfacts and not actually attributed to Machin's Mills...

BillJones

None of the answers to this poll suit me.

The encapsulations should be limited to very old, contemporary counterfeits that have a collector following. These items deserve coverage because if the market becomes large enough outfits like the Chinese counterfeiters will copy them.

I know that this is a slippery slope and that we need to be careful. Opening the floodgates to stuff like collecting the generations of Chinese fakes would be disastrous for the hobby IMO. That stuff needs to labeled as crap and needs be treated as crap.

coinsarefun

Since this thread title offends no one please respond here and contribute thoughtful insight on the original question.

Walkerfan

<< <i>In my personal opinion, no. >>

jmcu12

There is the 1804 Dollar Electrotype that is in PCGS plastic. But it was slabbed because it was a mint product with documented provenance.

I voted no but for some of these Electrotypes and other 'copies' that have that kind of history; perhaps it might be worthy and worth the time IMO.

With that said, I do think if they (TPG) are going to do so that it be done in a way that makes it VERY obvious. I think that ICG has the correct idea with that garish yellow label. It is very obvious that this is not a regular holder and assures that any sale of said slab is represented accurately.

In fact I might send in my 1793 Electrotype chain cent just for the fun of it.


*edited for clarity*

astrorat

<< <i>Since this thread title offends no one please respond here and contribute thoughtful insight on the original question. >>

Thanks, Stefanie. The title of the other thread is now more gentle and caring ... a virtual numismatic hug. Although I am sure some offense will be taken by somebody!

johnny9434

no way.

mr1931S

On the one hand we have the encapsulation tied in with being a learning tool.On the other hand,isn't encapsulating known counterfeits actually encouraging the production of counterfeits?

I'm lukewarm on the encapsulation/learning tool idea.I say TPG's should NOT encapsulate known counterfeits.I would say that TPG's who are encapsulating known counterfeits are being detrimental to the hobby of coin collecting.

I advocate self slabbing/encapsulation of counterfeit coins for the enthusiast.

ColonelJessup

<< <i>I'd like the TPGs to do it. It would be good for those of us who collect counterfeits, and it would be good for educational purposes.

However, I doubt it will ever happen to any significant extent. As things are now, TPG's are able to advertise that "If you buy a coin in a XYZ holder, you know it's authentic". Slabbing counterfeits would complicate the message that needs to be told.

BTW, there is one other issue. If a TPG were to start slabbing counterfeits, they would want to differentiate between "contemporary counterfeits", i.e., those made long ago for the purpose of passing as money, and other fakes that were made later, for the purpose of being sold to a numismatist. However, the TPGs may not have sufficient expertise in these matters. That may seem trivial to some, but contemporary counterfeits can get expensive, and it may pay for modern day counterfeiters to make new copies of the old counterfeits. >>



+1

On the issue (pun intended) of counterfeits representing a "revenue stream", my take is that the number of contemporary counterfeits is greatly over-estimated due to the conflation of this miniscule subset with the very real and present danger of the Chinese "product". .

astrorat

Legality of ownership of counterfeits aside, I bet if one or more of the TPGs starting identifying some of the highly collected counterfeit pieces, such as the contemporary counterfeit Bust halves, that there a lot of interest.

BillJones

<< <i>Legality of ownership of counterfeits aside, I bet if one or more of the TPGs starting identifying some of the highly collected counterfeit pieces, such as the contemporary counterfeit Bust halves, that there a lot of interest. >>



I'm not so sure about that. A lot of collectors I've known who had an interest in such things were like early copper collectors. They were not fans of certification.

LochNESS

Why the distinction between old counterfeits and modern ones? Eventually, all that is modern will be old and "classic" or "ancient" it's just a matter of time.

Deny all or accept all. I do not believe you can clearly define one counterfeit apart from another. The US Mint electrotypes aren't counterfeits, because they came from the Mint / were made by the Mint. Anything that did not come from the government Mint should not be slabbed.

indeetlib

<< <i>Why the distinction between old counterfeits and modern ones? Eventually, all that is modern will be old and "classic" or "ancient" it's just a matter of time.

Deny all or accept all. I do not believe you can clearly define one counterfeit apart from another. The US Mint electrotypes aren't counterfeits, because they came from the Mint / were made by the Mint. Anything that did not come from the government Mint should not be slabbed. >>



I think one major and important distinction to consider is the difference between counterfeits made to pass in commerce and those either made for or to fool collectors. Aside from the 1804 $1 electro (which is actually mint product as already discussed) and a few of the classic restrike issues (1804 Cent, 1823 Cent, etc.) I can't think of any other counterfeits made for or to fool collectors that are slabbed by NGC or PCGS and I would like to see that be the criteria for which counterfeits should be slabbed.

Of course the TPGs can slab whatever they want and whatever the collector/the market demands and those things can change over time.